Amusingly, the RIAA's response was that it chose not to have Cogill make the propaganda tapes because of the "unnecessarily high production costs." Leave it to the RIAA -- the organization that pays its boss over $2 million and spends millions on lawsuits that bring nothing back -- to think it's too expensive to record a guy talking. But, perhaps it's telling. Maybe the folks at the RIAA really don't recognize the revolution in recording equipment that makes it rather cheap to record things these days. No wonder their strategy has been so screwed up!

Copyright Issues

That is why the RIAA didn't make the propaganda tapes. They would be downloaded so that other people could make them accessible to the Masses which would violate copyright. Then the RIAA would be in the position of potentially suing someone who is spreading the word about how worthwhile and wonderful the RIAA is. Even THEY saw what a PR nightmare that would be...

Subject

If they forced a guy to make a statement, it would seem like when t*rrorists capture people, forcing them to read their propaganda with their hands tied behind their back and bombs strapped around their body with guns held to their head by captors wearing bandannas.

This is pretty much how the RIAA would want the world to be. In an ideal world they would have their jihadists put crosshairs on our politicians forcing them to change the laws so that the RIAA can do whatever they want, and forcing our government officials and the presses to read/publish their propaganda.

Nullifying your own propaganda

I wonder what would happen if someone recorded the RIAA's propaganda--meanwhile recording and distributing as widely as possible another set of videos saying that everything in the RIAA propaganda was a lie that he was forced to regurtigate, and systematically fisking all the Copyright Nazis' bullshit arguments.

Is there any express stipulation in the sentence that would prohibit that? And if so, how about doing so afterward when the house arrest or probation is over?